The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Teaching for Indoctrination

There
is a blogsite called “Discover
the Networks
: A Guide to the Political Left,” which is a treasure
trove of well-written, well-thought out, and thoroughly documented essays on
various topics which anyone concerned with contemporary political and cultural
trends should read. One of the latest entries is an excellent précis on the
life of Yassir
Arafat
as the godfather of modern Islamic terrorism. Another eye-opening
column is The
Islamist Infiltration of the Obama Administration
, which exposes a roll
call of activist Muslims hand-picked by Barack Obama and his cronies. Throughout
each article are links to the writer’s “backup documentation” and
cited information. I highly recommend “Discover the Networks” as a
source of information and as an educational tool.
Most
of the pieces are updated versions of articles that appeared elsewhere. The
site is under the aegis of Freedom Center’s Neo-Conservative David Horowitz,
with whom I disagree on many subjects, not least of which was his disgraceful and
unapologetic treatment of Diana West and her book, American
Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character
last year (reviewed here),
and the attendant smear campaign against her, which he orchestrated and oversaw.
Because Neo-Cons are against socialism, communism, and other totalitarian
“isms,” but are for nothing but a vague status quo, I certainly
cannot endorse Horowitz and his colleagues, and this column should not be
interpreted as an unqualified endorsement of Horowitz et al. But Discover the Networks, insofar as it provides factual
ammunition about what the Left and Islamist activism have been up to for over a
generation, Discover the Networks (DTN) has an intrinsic value for anyone
wishing to grasp current political and cultural trends.
That
being said, another article captured my attention, dated February 26th,
Teaching
for Change
“” (TFC), which presents the history of an organization
committed to “transforming” America by “transforming” the
way Americans from kindergarten up through high school and college are taught
American history from a Marxist perspective, and of the methods and purposes of
socialist indoctrination in America’s schools. (Unfortunately, the links in the
DTN article have expired; the reader is directed to TFC’s new and revamped
site, here.)
Founded in 1990, Teaching for
Change (TFC) is an organization that seeks to turn K-12 schools into “centers
of justice where students learn to read, write, and change the world.”
Moreover, it aims to transform America into a more “equitable, multicultural
society” populated with “active global citizens.”
Toward these ends, TFC’s Early
Childhood Equity Initiative (ECEI) sponsors professional seminars designed “to
develop leaders in early childhood education,” both in metro DC and nationwide.
Proceeding from the premise that the United States is a country rife with
racism and discrimination against nonwhite minorities, this Initiative “embrace[s]“
an anti-racism/anti-oppression approach” that promotes “curricula,
environments, programs, policies and standards that are equitable,
culturally-responsive and linguistically consistent with the diverse communities
served by our profession.”
There
is a reverse parallel to be observed between Nazi educational ends and American
Leftist educational ends. The Nazis educated children to be unquestioning,
loyal, docile manqués who would believe anything the Party said and follow the
Party wherever they were led. Developing intellectual or critical skills was
either frowned upon or suppressed. All this was to ensure the “racial
purity” of the German race.
The
New Foundation website on Nazism and Hitler stated the means and ends of Nazi
education
:
There were three major aims of
the youth training program developed for the Hitler Youth: character building ,
physical training, and training in the National Socialist world-view.
Educational training for the first 5 years, 10-14, focused on the first two
objectives: character building and physical training .  At the age of 15
physical training and training in the National Socialist world-view were emphasized
(Childs, 1938, p. xix).   Each of the disciplines taught were given a
Nazi slant especially History and Biology.  “History was based on the
glory of Germany… Biology became a study of the different races to ‘prove’ that
the Nazi belief in racial superiority was a sound belief…” (Trueman, 2000,
para. 4).
There was also a “service or
community learning” component, the purpose of which was both practical, in that
it provided a source of cheap labor, and also ideological because it reinforced
socialist ideals. By being forced to mix with the less privileged sections of
the community, students would be reminded that they were all [national
comrades] together. “Service in the Hitler Youth is honorary service to the
German people… the true, great, practical school is… in the labor camp, for
here instruction and words cease and action begins” (Groban, 1990).
If the goal of education prior to
Hitler was to enrich the student personally, the goal after his rise to power
changed to one which focused on the preparation of the student for service to
the state. Education was used as a form of social selection by which only the
best racial participants would rise up and serve as the next generation of
German leaders. The child was something to be molded and was no longer a person
but rather an object whose purpose was to without question or hesitation accept
Nazi doctrine
The
American Left’s educational ends are also to produce unquestioning, loyal,
docile manqués of every conceivable race but white or Caucasian (including
Jews), who must take a backseat to all other races and ethnicities (as
punishment for being “dominant”). The emphasis on race is clear and
pointed.
Rejecting the notion that
foreign-born immigrants should subordinate their own cultural practices and
mores to those of the U.S., ECEI “promote[s] the principle of pluralism” which
“embrace[s] the uniqueness and value of all cultures” and “incorporate[s]” each
participant’s “native/home language into [the] curriculum.” The Initiative also
places emphasis on environmental concerns, urging “the use of recycled
materials” as one of numerous avenues toward the promotion of “social equity.”
Another
aspect of Nazi educational philosophy was to glorify German history and
culture, and to imbue German students with the will to defend and even die to
uphold German cultural and racial “superiority.” Teaching for Change,
however, reflects the Left’s nihilist, deconstructionist ends. The DTN paper
notes:
TFC also co-sponsors (with
Rethinking Schools) the Zinn Education
Project
, which incorporates into classroom curricula the writings of the
late historian Howard Zinn—especially his best-selling book A People’s History of the United States.
This Marxist tract describes America as a predatory and repressive capitalist
state that serves only the interests of wealthy white men who exploit workers,
American Indians, slaves, women, blacks, and populists.
From
the TFC site:
“The Zinn Education
Project
promotes and supports the use of A People’s History of the
United States 
and other people’s history materials in middle and high
school classrooms across the country. The Zinn Education Project is
a collaboration between Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change.
The goal is to introduce students
to a more accurate, complex, and engaging understanding of United States
history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula. The empowering
potential of studying U.S. history is often lost in a textbook-driven trivial
pursuit of names and dates.
Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States emphasizes
the role of working people, women, people of color, and organized social
movements in shaping history. Students learn that history is made not by a few
heroic individuals, but instead by people’s choices and actions and therefore
students’ own choices and actions also matter.”
The
Nazi educational policy was to “unify” history by making Germany the fountainhead
of all Western progress, and by demoting other nations, such as Britain and
France, to subsidiary, dependent, almost parasitic roles. The American Left’s educational
policy is to disintegrate any kind of thematic impetus behind Western progress,
characterizing such progress as the fruits of oppression of ethnic, religious,
and other “minority” groups.  For
example, there is this interesting page on the TFC site, written by “Alison Kysia,” about “Challenging
White
Privilege
in Children’s Books”:
 As an educator and a parent, I need children’s
books that represent the diversity of my children, students, and our community.
This is easier said than done. Data collected by the Cooperative Children’s Book Center
indicates that from 2008-2012 only 10% of children’s books published were
about people of color
despite the fact that 37% of the U.S. population are
people of color. That means that 90% of all children’s book published in the
United States feature white characters or animals. This has to change.
The
Nazi educational philosophy was to stress German history and culture, and to instill
in German students a sense of German “superiority” in all matters. The
American Left’s educational philosophy, through such programs as “Common
Core,” is to denigrate American history and culture, rewrite it, revise
it, adulterate it, with the conscious purpose of turning American students
against their own country.
Bennett
Murray highlighted the Nazi educational policy in an article on Suite101:
To Hitler, intellectualism was
correlated with a lack of patriotism, racial mixing and, most ominously, Jewry.
Thus, the role of education would be not to encourage creative inquiry, which
leads to unpredictable results, but to mold the mind to unquestionably accept
the core tenets of Nazism as articles of faith.
Martin
Heidegger, the Nazis’ foremost intellectual proponent, was explicit about the
means and ends of education in the Nazi state:
The mentality of Nazi academia
can also be captured in the rector address of legendary philosopher (as well as
Nazi Party member) Martin Heidegger at the University of Freiburg, where he
lays out the students’ three obligations, both as members of the university and
as citizens of the Third Reich. “The first obligation is to the community of
the people,” he said, with the second obligation “to the honor and fate of the
nation in the midst of other peoples,” which primarily encompasses military
service.
The third obligation, which
Heidegger defined as “the spiritual mission of the German nation,” is the most
telling to where he placed the priorities of Nazi German academia. The causes
he listed for this obligation tend to reflect a thoroughly Nazi view of
Germany’s place in the world, with particular emphasis on the metaphysical
national “spirit” : “Our nation realizes its own fate by risking its history in
the arena of world power in which all human existence is affected and by
continually fighting for its own spiritual world.” Knowledge is essential to
fulfill this mission, but Heideggar explains that the servicing of knowledge by
the state is vital.“The professions create and administer that highest and most
essential knowledge of the nation concerned with its total existence,”
explained Heidegger. “But to us this knowledge is not a merely quietistic
cognizance of spirit and values itself, but an awareness of that greatest
danger for our own existence, posed by the superior powers of being.”
The
American Left’s program is similarly anti-mind, and anti-knowledge. It wishes
to bring about a “multicultural society” in which no culture is esteemed
more than another, that all cultures are equal, and all individuals, no matter
their intellectual abilities, are products of their “natural”
cultural heritage.
As
with the Left’s agenda, it was so with the Nazis. Murray writes:
This attitude [an animus towards
the individual] was common amongst German conservatives even before the rise of
the Third Reich, with former Freikorps member Ernst Von Salomon making a
similar argument in 1930: “The intellectual speaks and writes ‘I.’ He feels no
connectedness,” claimed Salomon. “He causes disintegration, the disintegration
of the mass of individual beings into the particularized individual beings, who
henceforth stands not under and not over the people, but at their side.”
Whereas individual intellects
were shunned, individual racial characteristics took the former’s place as the
predominant factor to be considered. For example, the 1941 admission
regulations to the Friedrich-Wilhelm University of Berlin contained extensive
racial requirements and national service requirements for prospective students,
but there is little mention of expected academic standards.This is primarily
because the Nazis converted the Nietzscheanübermenschfrom an intellectual idol
into a racial idol, and this was reflected in the schooling system.
Make
no mistake about it: squirming beneath the “multicultural” mask of
TCF is a racist agenda. It leaches like poisoned ground water up through cracks
in the cement. It manifests itself no matter how prettily the “social
justice” and “victimhood” tunes are played.
Capitalism,
of course, means freedom. TFC is as anti-capitalist and anti-freedom as was
Nazism. Another DTN paper, “Teaching
social justice, anti-Americanism, & Leftism in the K-12 Classroom
,”
explains:
In 2004, education researchers
David Steiner and Susan Rozen conducted a study on the syllabi of the basic
“foundations of education” and “methods” courses in 16 of the nation’s most
prestigious teacher-education schools. The mainstays of the foundations classes
were works by Paolo Freire, the Brazilian education theorist who is considered
the “father” of the “teaching for social justice” movement, and the
radical education writer Jonathan Kozol. For the methods courses, the leading
text was To Teach: The Journey of a Teacher, authored by the former
Weather Underground terrorist and lifelong Marxist, Bill Ayers, Professor of
Education at the University of Illinois and perhaps the most influential
promoter of “social justice” education in American schools today.

When Ayers himself was a student at Columbia University’s Teachers College in
the 1980s, after coming up from the underground, he was deeply influenced by
Professor Maxine Greene, a leading light of the “critical pedagogy” movement.
Greene told Ayers and his fellow classmates that they could help change this
bleak landscape by developing a “transformative” vision of social justice and
democracy in their classrooms. Greene urged teachers not to mince words with
children about the evils of the existing social order. She said they should
portray homelessness, for instance, “as a consequence of the private dealings
of landlords, an arms buildup as a consequence of corporate decisions, [and]
racial exclusion as a consequence of a private property-holder’s choice.”

This message resonated strongly with Ayers, who had already failed in his
effort to transform America through violent revolution. He went on to earn a
Ph.D. in education and became a Distinguished Professor of Education and a
Senior University Scholar at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
The
federal government is now embedded not only in the nation’s public schools, but
sets the standards for what its bureaucrats and fellow-travelers in the
education field wish to impose on the whole country. This is most notably
represented by “Common Core.”
The federal government bribed many states to adopt Common Core, according to
the New York Times, in a contest to see which state would best implement the
program and get a piece of that $4 billion in school improvement funds. In its July
21st, 2010 article, “Many States
Adopt National Standards for their Schools
,” Tamar Lewin wrote:
Less than two months after the
nation’s governors and state school chiefs released their final recommendations
for national education standards, 27 states have adopted them and about a dozen
more are expected to do so in the next two weeks….
The quick adoption of common
standards for what students should learn in English and math each year from
kindergarten through high school is attributable in part to the Obama
administration’s Race to the Top competition. States that adopt the standards
by Aug. 2 win points in the competition for a share of the $3.4 billion to be
awarded in September.
“I’m ecstatic,” said Arne Duncan, the secretary of
education. “This has been the third rail of education, and the fact that you’re
now seeing half the nation decide that it’s the right thing to do is a
game-changer.”
Who
is Arne Duncan? Obama’s Secretary of Education. This is the guy who targeted
white
suburban moms
” for opposing Common Core, Duncan’s personal project to
bring all American children under the federal government’s thumb.
One
solution to Common Core and the state mandating “standards” of
education is to get the government out of education. We are already saddled
with semi-literate students from K-12, many of the older ones, with stars in
their eyes and echo chambers for minds, old enough to have voted for Obama. Getting
the government out of education will help arrest our progress towards
totalitarianism.
For
a dramatization of what such an “education” can do to young people,
see director Thomas Carter’s “Swing Kids.”

Previous

Being Beastly to the Germans

Next

Our Sociopathic Political Class

1 Comment

  1. Michael Neibel

    If one wants to see how Hitler was determined to practice altruism consistently see his speech to German youth. I think it's still on u-tube.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén